I agree he should've won more, but if any of the following had/handn't occurred he would have won the 2007 6N. I don't think any of these were within his control;

- The breakaway try Italy scored right at the end of the game against us - Elvis Vermuelen's try in the last play of the game against Scotland (I still don't know how they saw the ball being grounded) - Clerc's try in Croker (which denied us the Slam, arguably)

He needed ALL of those to go against him NOT to win the 6N, which is pretty unlucky. I don't think he's a better or worse coach for that French try against the Scots being awarded.

johng wrote:Hey. Why does no one rate d'aul triple crown? We now have one more than Scotland for the first time.

And 7 of their 10 were won when France was not involved

Which is code for "a long time ago"

Its archaic (not to be harsh) and/or a weak pandering to sponsorshipIts a hangover from when it was just the "home" nations/that had more importance and a hangover from when beating France was too ridiculous to contemplate

A trophy within a tournament for beating 3 of the 5 other teams in the tournament and 2 of the teams arent eligible for it and a team can win the whole tournament by a distance but not win this quirky sub trophy

johng wrote:Hey. Why does no one rate d'aul triple crown? We now have one more than Scotland for the first time.

And 7 of their 10 were won when France was not involved

Which is code for "a long time ago"

Eurovision syndrome. We won it a few times under EOS and got fed up not winning bigger prizes so we learnt to quietly hate it.

Better to win it than not to win it in most circumstances, but it's an anachronism.

We won four games in the 2001 Six Nations and four games in the 2003 edition and finished second in the table both times. We won the same number of games in 2004, 2006 and 2007 and finished in the same position on the table, but we got a trophy for it. That's odd.

The Triple Crown is one of those good traditions.It marks the foundation of what is now the 6Ns and doesn't in any way diminish the winning of the 6Ns or better still a GS.To mock/dismiss it is to not only mock/dismiss our own achievements but the achievements of others.

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall who's the greatest player of them all? It is Drico your majesty.

hugonaut wrote:We won four games in the 2001 Six Nations and four games in the 2003 edition and finished second in the table both times. We won the same number of games in 2004, 2006 and 2007 and finished in the same position on the table, but we got a trophy for it. That's odd.

Further, we won four games in 2014 and four games in 2015 and won the championship.

So the guy who was coaching us in the noughties might actually have been a pretty decent coach who is indeed in a position to criticise Joe. He may be right, or he may be wrong, and people might agree with him or not, but to suggest that he had no right to do so because he won nothing is simply revisionism.

We've been over this many times.EOS underachieved for two main reasons.He was Munster centric in his selections.He didn't develop strength in depth.MO'D compared to Cullen being the worst example.He refused to select Miller Quinlan and Wallace as his first choice BR even once.Lawrence Dallaglio critised him publicly for starting Costello ahead of Miller for example.He didn't even use his substitutes well preferring to flog his first choice 15.Etc etc. Thereby missing an opportunity to develop other players.Oh and he was Long enough in the job to build strength in depth.He didn't earn the right to criticise JS but like the rest of us he's entitled to his opinion.In a positive sense he wasn't a great coach but he was a good coach.He'd be ideal for Ulster right now.

Mirror, Mirror on the Wall who's the greatest player of them all? It is Drico your majesty.

Not quite sure where to post this so here seems a decent place. Someone on Reddit compiled various statistics on Irish players during the tournament.Some quite interesting ones:POM was our 3rd top tackler (42) after his backrow counterpart, but he missed 0! Furlong, Healy and Porter also missed 0 tackles, and had tackle counts in the 20s.Kearney beat the most defenders (18) and had the second highest metres made (331), just 20m off Stockdale.Stander was miles ahead on number of carries (95), with Leavy in 2nd place (58)

RoboProp wrote:When you think about EOS and the players he had, and what they actually won (nothing); and then you see him on the box criticising Joe...yeah.

They won the triple crown three times - now I realise that the revisionist view is that this isn't worth anything, but it involved beating the then current world champions three times in four years, it was something that Ireland hadn't done for 18 years and at the time was considered a massive leap forward for Irish rugby along with us being ranked as high as third in the world

On top of this we began to beat southern hemisphere opposition, we hadn't beaten Australia since the 60s in Dublin and the 70s at all until we won in 2002 , we hadn't beaten South Africa in Dublin since the 60s until 2004.

Theres a view out there that Irish rugby started in 2009 (or 2006 depending which side of the mason dixon line you're from) and that everything from before that is of little or no value and has no relevance to today. Thats simply not true. Joe Schmidt is the best coach Ireland has ever had. This Grand Slam is the greatest achievement in the history of the Irish national team. But these things don't happen in isolation.

Regardless of what anyone thinks about the Triple Crown's value, that team definitely underachieved. You wonder what might have been had Gatland not been fired and O'Sullivan continued as backs coach.

Well I think its only fair to judge this team against teams in recent history, around the time when the game went professional. For all we know there could have been fantastic teams in the past who have been forgotten about.

Anyway, of the professional era, the squad of players is definitely the strongest and the team is as good as previous teams. The difference between this and previous teams is this is mostly a very young side that will improve further. Thats the exciting thing about it.

One big difference between this side and previous generations is the current side have no baggage. Previous generations carried a load of baggage and that held them back IMO. Whenever Ireland were playing France all the talk would be about Ireland hadn't won in Paris in so many decades and the French players would be hyped up into god like players. The Irish players really lacked belief, even up until recently.

In 6 nations history Ireland are second to England in terms of games won but its more interesting to compare Ireland to Wales. Ireland have won 11 games more thn Wales and Irelands points difference is +671 compared to Wales' +225. That reflects the provinces dominance over the regions yet Wales have won more 6 nations titles than us plus they've won 3 grand slams in that time compared to Irelands 2 grand slams. The Welsh have won more 6 nations titles because they believed in themselves whereas Ireland's lack of belief resulted in things like the last minute Clerc try in Croke park, being camped on the Welsh line and not getting over, the All blacks last min try in 2013 etc. That mental baggage is like a horse carrying extra weight in the big races.

So its refreshing to see todays team of young players go out and look comfortable in the big games. They have grown up looking at Ireland and the provinces winning things thanks to the golden generation of players who changed the culture of the team. They now have a grand slam in their locker and I think the Sexton drop goal against France was massive in terms of the belief it gave the players, just like the win over NZ was.

dropkick wrote:Well I think its only fair to judge this team against teams in recent history, around the time when the game went professional. For all we know there could have been fantastic teams in the past who have been forgotten about.

Anyway, of the professional era, the squad of players is definitely the strongest and the team is as good as previous teams. The difference between this and previous teams is this is mostly a very young side that will improve further. Thats the exciting thing about it.

One big difference between this side and previous generations is the current side have no baggage. Previous generations carried a load of baggage and that held them back IMO. Whenever Ireland were playing France all the talk would be about Ireland hadn't won in Paris in so many decades and the French players would be hyped up into god like players. The Irish players really lacked belief, even up until recently.

In 6 nations history Ireland are second to England in terms of games won but its more interesting to compare Ireland to Wales. Ireland have won 11 games more thn Wales and Irelands points difference is +671 compared to Wales' +225. That reflects the provinces dominance over the regions yet Wales have won more 6 nations titles than us plus they've won 3 grand slams in that time compared to Irelands 2 grand slams. The Welsh have won more 6 nations titles because they believed in themselves whereas Ireland's lack of belief resulted in things like the last minute Clerc try in Croke park, being camped on the Welsh line and not getting over, the All blacks last min try in 2013 etc. That mental baggage is like a horse carrying extra weight in the big races.

So its refreshing to see todays team of young players go out and look comfortable in the big games. They have grown up looking at Ireland and the provinces winning things thanks to the golden generation of players who changed the culture of the team. They now have a grand slam in their locker and I think the Sexton drop goal against France was massive in terms of the belief it gave the players, just like the win over NZ was.

Excellent post, and I think you're very much on the money there.

“As you all know first prize is a Cadillac El Dorado. Anyone wanna see second prize? Second prize is a set of steak knives. Third prize is you're fired.”